The Fantastic Beasts Series

[Camera One]

I liked the first movie and the characters were fun, but it felt like a stand-alone and not like the first movie of a multi-part epic that it seems to want to be.  If they wanted to tell the story of Grindelwald vs. Dumbledore, they could have done that from the beginning, and made us care about the two of them.

The second movie sort of turned me off the franchise with its manufactured drama to keep the characters from the first movie relevant and in the process sort of destroyed some of them (eg. Queenie).  

Sadly, this trailer didn't make the movie seem very interesting.  I'll still watch it, but I can't imagine any more Dumbledore "secrets" I care about.  I liked Dumbledore in the original movies, but he was just boring in the second Fantastic Beasts movie and nothing about the trailer seems to suggest otherwise.  

Edited December 15, 2021 by Camera One

[stealinghome]

...is Tina even IN this movie? Because I didn't see her in the trailer at all, unless I missed something.

It's not a bad trailer, but it still feels like this series is trying to tell 2-3 different stories and jamming them together.

[Cherpumple]

4 hours ago, stealinghome said:

..is Tina even IN this movie? Because I didn't see her in the trailer at all, unless I missed something.

Not that I saw. I have heard in other places that the actress who plays her was quite ill during the filming, so Tina's part was rewritten to be drastically reduced. If true, that's disappointing to me, since I like her character and she has key relationships with both Newt and Queenie. There has been other speculation that they got around the filming issue by having Tina polyjuice her way through the movie in the guise of someone else (such as Newt's assistant Bunty), but I hate this idea so I hope it's not true.

[KatWay]

I thought the first film was good, not a masterpiece but entertaining with a somewhat silly plot at times (the execution...what even was that). The second one was absolutely terrible.

my problem is that I think Newt is a good character, Dumbledore/Grindelwald dynamic should in theory be very interesting to watch (especially now with the Mads upgrade) but instead we spend sooo much time on Ezra Miller's character who I just don't give a crap about. He drags down every scene he's in. And he's for some reason the central figure in all these films when I wish they were about the characters I actually kind of like.

[Luckylyn]

I really liked the first Fantastic Beast movie but hated the second. I just think JK isn’t a great screenplay writer.   There are things that make no sense and storylines that eat up screen time  that end up being pointless.  The second was so poorly done I won’t be seeing the next one.

Why It’s The Worst

 

 

[BetterButter]

 

[Anela]

I've just watched the second one, and don't understand why they had Queenie go with this guy. I loved her reactions in the apartment, with the teapot, and the woman who kept her from leaving. She made my dad LOL, too. He didn't like most of the movie, and I was enjoying some of it, just because they were at Hogwarts. 

I'm going to have to watch the first one again. We saw it in the theatre Thanksgiving weekend, I think it was, 2016, and it was a fun little movie. I'm a sucker for animals, even if they are fictitious, so I loved some of them in this second movie, too. 

[Anela]

I don't think I'll be seeing the third one yet, unless it's at the drive-in (I've just found out that they're open now), but I love Mads Mikkelson. I loved Hannibal - he was perfect. 

[AngieBee1]

Fantastic Beasts: Secrets of Dumbledore is a much better film than The Crimes of Grindlewald. Granted I am not a Harry Potter fan so my only connection to the universe are the Fantastic Beasts films so while there are some who were expecting more exploration of the universe, for the story they are telling it was fine.

It's not as jaunty as the first one, thankfully not as turgid as the second; instead it's well-paced, utilized the core cast well and was an entertaining caper in many parts. 

[dmeets]

Since it seems to be a better than 50/50 chance that Warner Bros. pulls the plug on the series, I’m glad this one ended on a mostly positive note and without any big cliffhangers. 

In fact, it felt like if the series still gets its last two films, it is going to be transitioning away from Newt and friends with Dumbledore playing the main hero now that he’s allowed to get in on the action.

Very glad Mads took over the role, as I can’t see Depp’s portrayal of the character as someone who could charm the masses. 

Edited April 15, 2022 by dmeets

[KatWay]

I liked the third one. It actually made me wish we could get to see that final Dumbledore/Grindelwald duel that leads to his imprisonment, their chemistry was great and their confrontation was already a highlight of the series.

the plot is still pretty thin and some of the "twists" you could see from a mile away so a very expected story, nothing truly original but some cool scenes for sure. Jude Law and Mads Mikkelsen are great in their roles IMO and Newt remains a good character though I also think he works better as a less central hero figure. Dumbledore's problem I guess is that he's just too ridiculously powerful to work as the main protagonist cause there's no real sense of danger about him, for one because we already know he survives and also because he's just playing with his opponents (other than Grindelwald). Like even Credence wasn't giving him any trouble, really.

[Bill1978]

4 hours ago, KatWay said:

Like even Credence wasn't giving him any trouble, really.

And if the franchise is to continue they defintiley dodged a PR bullet by having Credence basically die at the end of the movie.

I loved this movie, it opened last week in Australia and been dying to say how much I loved it. Not as good as the first one but way better than the second. And happy that if the franchise does end, it has as satisfying conclusion to the story even if I confess I don't fully understand the political motivations etc happening. I've just pretended it was a Hitler analogy.

I'm a fan of the Potterverse, but honestly I don't know what the extreme fans have against these films. Personally I would have been super bored if it was just laying out details linked to the original series. My only complaint is that as the lead character, Newt sure was shoved to the side.

I look forward to someone more talented and with more time to edit all 3 movies so they just featured all the scenes with the fantastic beasts. Cause honestly all those scenes are the highlights of their respective films. Maybe because Eddie Redmayne is so hilarious impersonating mythical creatures.

It is a shame they didn't just make a series of Newt going around cataloguing beasts for his books and having little adventures along the way.

But I definitely recommend people watch this film, even if it's just to hear some of the original musical themes from the original series.

[JimmyJabloon]

I liked all three movies. 

[Browncoat]

I enjoyed the Secrets of Dumbledore a lot.  Like all of you, though, I am glad they sort of wrapped things up, just in case.  I mean, yes, Grindelwald is still on the loose (and he has the Elder Wand), but if the series ends now, it'll be okay.

I would like to see how Dumbledore ends up with the Elder Wand, and it might be interesting to see how he comes to have the Resurrection Stone as well.  I'd also like to know how James Potter got the Invisibility Cloak, for that matter.  I haven't delved too deeply into Pottermore -- maybe those questions are answered there.

But I'm glad that Credence gets to go home with Aberforth, even if it's just for a short while.  

And I'm very glad they recast Grindelwald.  I can't imagine Johnny Depp having that kind of chemistry with Jude Law.  Mads and Jude were great together.

I couldn't help but think of The Thomas Crown Affair (Pierce Brosnan version) when they each had a case to carry.  I loved that each person's case reflected who they were -- Jacob's filled with pastry, Lally's with books, and I guess Theseus played Quidditch?  Anyway, I got a kick out of it.  

Of course, Newt and Theseus imitating the crab/scorpion things was awesome.  Did everyone notice that the jailer was missing his shiny silver tooth, too?

I think my only quibble was that it was a bit on the long side.  Oh, and that there wasn't enough Tina.

[Bill1978]

4 hours ago, Browncoat said:

 I mean, yes, Grindelwald is still on the loose (and he has the Elder Wand), but if the series ends now, it'll be okay.

He does? Based solely on the Fantastic Beasts movies should I have known this?

4 hours ago, Browncoat said:

I think my only quibble was that it was a bit on the long side.  Oh, and that there wasn't enough Tina.

I agree about the length, I caught myself looking at my watch a couple of times but then I'm not sure what they should have cut out. And if anyone says shorten the crab scene I will be disappointed haha.

And apparently with the change in production dates etc the actress had scheduling conflicts, but the conspiracy out there is her role was reduced to her criticising JKR (without mentioing by name) over JKR's Tweets

4 hours ago, Browncoat said:

I would like to see how Dumbledore ends up with the Elder Wand, and it might be interesting to see how he comes to have the Resurrection Stone as well.  I'd also like to know how James Potter got the Invisibility Cloak, for that matter.  I haven't delved too deeply into Pottermore -- maybe those questions are answered there.

I totally understand wanting to know these details, but I don't think the Fantastic Beasts films are the place for them. Just like as much as I enjoyed 3, I really don't think Dumbledore's family and relationship drama belonged in Fantastic Beasts. These movies had potential to tell original tales but I guess WB was too scared that audiences wouldn't flock to them if they weren't connected to Harry Potter's story enough. So we get this bizarre hybrid of movies where the Potterverse stories get pushed to the front, while Newt's original stories get sidelined.

[Browncoat]

1 hour ago, Bill1978 said:

He does? Based solely on the Fantastic Beasts movies should I have known this?

The wand Grindelwald was using looked like the Elder Wand Dumbledore had (before Voldemort acquired it).

1 hour ago, Bill1978 said:

I agree about the length, I caught myself looking at my watch a couple of times but then I'm not sure what they should have cut out. And if anyone says shorten the crab scene I will be disappointed haha.

I agree with that!  I loved the crab/scorpion scene.  "Swivel your hips more!"

 

[Bill1978]

5 hours ago, Browncoat said:

I agree with that!  I loved the crab/scorpion scene.  "Swivel your hips more!"

Ah the memory of that scene is almost enough to make me travel an hour to re-watch the film. The way Newt looks at his brother like he has lsot his mind and then quickly decides it is best if he does follow his brothers lead.

[Chyromaniac]

I don’t know if this was any better a film than the second one, but I think I enjoyed it more.  If nothing else, I think this did a decent job of course correcting some of the more questionable elements of the series.  Mads was a better Grindlewald- he certainly comes off as more respectable than Depp, which I think works for this story.  Johnny’s version felt more like what GG would be today- a charismatic tech bro type fascist- rather than 90 years ago.  Mikkelsen seems much more like the cultured type that would be able to hold sway in this wizarding society.

I think they also managed to smooth over some of the weird familial stuff with Credence.  Making him Aberforth’s son isn’t a great solution, but I think it’s slightly more palatable than a long lost brother.  Still, it felt like the film was trying very much to turn him into a new Snape- unless “the dark lord’s long dark haired, pale, androgynous flunkie with conflicted morals” is just a timeless concept in wizarding circles.  I get that part of this is that Ezra Miller has a certain aesthetic- but it still felt like they were trying to fit Credence into that look/role.  Given everything else going on, I’m okay with this potentially being the end for the character- but overall it’s a storyline that doesn’t really seem to have had a purpose past the first fantastic beasts anyway.

Speaking of, I really liked that finding a fantastic beast actually was relevant to the story again.  It was nice to put the focus back on Newt’s work, since he’s nominally the main character of this series.  All of the scenes with him and the creatures reminded me of what this series could have been- a regular wizard, traveling the globe, solving problems involving mythical animals.  Instead, they decided to graft in all of this Harry Potter pre-history.  Granted, the Dumbledore/Grindlewald story was pretty good here- but it’a always felt like a sidetrack from what these movies could have been.  Let them have their own stories, instead of bringing it through the side door of the cryptozoology guy’s stuff.  If the series continues- and at this point, who knows if it will- I’d like to keep the focus on Newt, although it seems like the only bullet WB has left in the gun is the big Albus-Gellart showdown.  Maybe they can take a lesson from the Furious franchise, and just spin-off those two into their own feature- and leave the fantastic beasts to the expert.

ETA: The Qilin should have bowed to Jacob at the end, not Dumbledore.  Then, he could have given the line about there being two of them originally, and maybe there’s someone else who was worthy.  But if the criteria is to be good and pure of heart, he’s the clear winner- and I think it would have said a lot more to the wizards about GG’s philosophy, if their magical deer had picked a muggle before any of them,

Edited April 18, 2022 by Chyromaniac

[joanne3482]

17 hours ago, Chyromaniac said:

ETA: The Qilin should have bowed to Jacob at the end, not Dumbledore.  Then, he could have given the line about there being two of them originally, and maybe there’s someone else who was worthy.  But if the criteria is to be good and pure of heart, he’s the clear winner- and I think it would have said a lot more to the wizards about GG’s philosophy, if their magical deer had picked a muggle before any of them,

That's what I was hoping too. Jacob was much purer of heart then Dumbledore. That was the whole point of him going along. He was willing to stand up for what was right even though he had no magic. Otherwise there was no point for him to go. Plus this means Dumbledore took a man with no magic to help fight a wizard fight. It is in line with future Dumbledore behavior but definitely doesn't say "pure heart" to me. 

[KatWay]

I figured it was meant to be a bit of a twist that it bowed to Dumbledore (see, he's pure of heart after all! even though he doesn't believe it!) but I also thought that made sense. The Qilin was meant to look for the best potential leader, not just the nicest person there and neither Jacob nor Newt (another candidate for being purer than Dumbledore) have leadership qualities for the magical community. That's also why it chose Miss Santos afterwards I'd assume. Kind of wish we'd seen more indication of her being the best candidate other than her stopping Jacob's curse but oh well.

I actually think Dumbledore might be the most interesting character of the franchise now, a man who keeps an ironclad control of himself and keeps himself apart from others because he knows how easy it would be to abuse his power and have that go wrong. The prequels fail in a lot of ways but they give a much better idea of why he usually doesn't act himself but rather sends others, at least in my opinion. He looks less like a manipulative person who'd rather sacrifice others for the greater good and more like someone who's very cognisant of how powerful he is in comparison to most and unwilling to take advantage of that. He fights Grindelwald (once he can) because he's his equal, nobody else really is.

[MaggieG]

I loved the swivel. It was my favorite part. 

[Tinawi]

Just came back from seeing secrets of dumbledore. Not as good as the first Beasts movie. Way better then the second. Mads was better then Depp. Looks like there could be another movie too. I hope so

[Bill1978]

10 hours ago, Tinawi said:

Looks like there could be another movie too. I hope so

Fingers crossed there is another movie BUT only if they commit to telling Newt's story instead of linking it to Harry's story and shoehorning stuff into the movie cause they are scared people won't connect to it. Just make it Newt running around collecting creatures and leave the politics out of it. You would have thought WB learnt from the Star Wars prequels that politics is not that exciting to watch in a fantasy/scifi prequels haha

[Tinawi]

3 hours ago, Bill1978 said:

Fingers crossed there is another movie BUT only if they commit to telling Newt's story instead of linking it to Harry's story and shoehorning stuff into the movie cause they are scared people won't connect to it. Just make it Newt running around collecting creatures and leave the politics out of it. You would have thought WB learnt from the Star Wars prequels that politics is not that exciting to watch in a fantasy/scifi prequels haha

Oh I don't mind the HP connection. As another poster stated I wouldn't mind seeing how dumbledore got the elder wand. I would like to see more of Newt and Tina as well. Lots of stuff to talk about in a new movie 🤞

Edited April 24, 2022 by Tinawi

[choclatechip45]

I saw Secrets of Dumbledore and I really liked it. I think the Creedence plotline brought down the movie and I think that was the only storyline they could have done without. 

[joanne3482]

19 hours ago, choclatechip45 said:

I saw Secrets of Dumbledore and I really liked it. I think the Creedence plotline brought down the movie and I think that was the only storyline they could have done without. 

I think it had a lot of potential, but felt like it just petered out. It was like they didn't know what to do with it.

[choclatechip45]

14 minutes ago, joanne3482 said:

I think it had a lot of potential, but felt like it just petered out. It was like they didn't know what to do with it.

Yeah I thought the beginning was super slow once we got to the middle and end it made sense. 

[Cherpumple]

I think I need to see this one again to really know whether I like it or not. I still love spending time in the wizarding world, but Crimes of Grindelwald made me lose a lot of faith in this franchise and I was quite apprehensive going into this one.

My biggest take away is that this movie was clearly meant to be a reset for the franchise, since it tied up all the main cliffhangers with neat little bows (Credance's identity, Queenie's allegiance, and the blood pact). It makes a serviceable ending if WB pulls the plug, and if they continue as planned it allows for the significant time jump they will need if they want to get to their presumed end date of the Dumbledore-Grindelwald duel in 1945.

I love the casting of Mads, and in that first scene the chemistry between him and Jude Law was palpable. Speaking of, was Dumbledore just imagining that scene, or was it a memory? I assumed it was the former, but other people interpreted it differently.

On 4/15/2022 at 3:15 PM, Browncoat said:

I would like to see how Dumbledore ends up with the Elder Wand, and it might be interesting to see how he comes to have the Resurrection Stone as well.  I'd also like to know how James Potter got the Invisibility Cloak, for that matter.  I haven't delved too deeply into Pottermore -- maybe those questions are answered there.

Not to get off track, but these are answered in the original HP series (fully in the books, partly in the movies). Grindelwald stole the elder wand as a teenager and had it until he was defeated by Dumbledore in 1945 (Grindelwald's been using it in the Fantastic Beast movies) and Dumbledore used it from 1945 until his death. At some point the resurrection stone became part of the heirloom ring owned by the Gaunt family (Voldemort's mother's family) and Voldemort stole it and turned it into a horcrux when he was a teenager. It was the only object to be both a Deathly Hallow and a horcrux, although Voldemort had no idea it was the former. Dumbledore found it on the grounds of the Gaunt's home (they were all dead at that point) in the summer before HP's sixth year at Hogwarts. James Potter's family was descended from the youngest Peverell brother, the who received the invisibility cloak from Death, and the cloak was presumably handed down through the generations.

[Browncoat]

4 hours ago, Cherpumple said:

I think I need to see this one again to really know whether I like it or not. I still love spending time in the wizarding world, but Crimes of Grindelwald made me lose a lot of faith in this franchise and I was quite apprehensive going into this one.

My biggest take away is that this movie was clearly meant to be a reset for the franchise, since it tied up all the main cliffhangers with neat little bows (Credance's identity, Queenie's allegiance, and the blood pact). It makes a serviceable ending if WB pulls the plug, and if they continue as planned it allows for the significant time jump they will need if they want to get to their presumed end date of the Dumbledore-Grindelwald duel in 1945.

I love the casting of Mads, and in that first scene the chemistry between him and Jude Law was palpable. Speaking of, was Dumbledore just imagining that scene, or was it a memory? I assumed it was the former, but other people interpreted it differently.

Not to get off track, but these are answered in the original HP series (fully in the books, partly in the movies). Grindelwald stole the elder wand as a teenager and had it until he was defeated by Dumbledore in 1945 (Grindelwald's been using it in the Fantastic Beast movies) and Dumbledore used it from 1945 until his death. At some point the resurrection stone became part of the heirloom ring owned by the Gaunt family (Voldemort's mother's family) and Voldemort stole it and turned it into a horcrux when he was a teenager. It was the only object to be both a Deathly Hallow and a horcrux, although Voldemort had no idea it was the former. Dumbledore found it on the grounds of the Gaunt's home (they were all dead at that point) in the summer before HP's sixth year at Hogwarts. James Potter's family was descended from the youngest Peverell brother, the who received the invisibility cloak from Death, and the cloak was presumably handed down through the generations.

Must be time for me to re-read the books...  🙂

[Spartan Girl]

Saw it tonight, and while it is complicated to be a wizarding world fan right now, I did enjoy it.

Madds Mikkelsen was a HUGE upgrade. Why didn’t they just cast him as Grindelwald in the first place?!

Happy that we finally got the whole tragic Dumbledore family history that the Deathly Hollows movie skimmed over. Credence/Aurelius bring Aberforth’s son might have been a better twist had it not come from such a convoluted path (i.e. the whole baby swapping plot in the last movie). God, poor Aberforth. On top of the terrible way he lost his parents and sister, he also lost his lover in the shipwreck (I assume her family sent her away when they found out she was pregnant), and his long-lost son suffered the same fate as Ariana because he was abused by his adopted mother. No wonder he and Albus were barely speaking.

Still pissed that Leta was killed off but I did love Lally.

Eddie was adorable. Jude Law was great as always. Great that they finally said flat out that he was in love with Grindelwald but feels a bit hollow considering certain things.

As always, the beasts were the best part. Pickett, Teddy, and the Qilin!!! 😍😍😍😍💔💔💔💔

On 4/17/2022 at 6:24 PM, Chyromaniac said:

ETA: The Qilin should have bowed to Jacob at the end, not Dumbledore.  Then, he could have given the line about there being two of them originally, and maybe there’s someone else who was worthy.

That would have been a hilarious in-your-face to the Grindelwald and his followers.

On 4/15/2022 at 3:15 PM, Browncoat said:

Of course, Newt and Theseus imitating the crab/scorpion things was awesome.  Did everyone notice that the jailer was missing his shiny silver tooth, too?

Lol I loved that.

Boo that we only got Tina at the end.

The fake cases with the explosions of pastries, monster books and the snitch felt so much like the first HP movies I wanted to cry.

Like most of you, I’m sure this may be the last movie and that’s probably for the best. Queenie and Jacob got their happy ending and we got closure with Credence.

Edited April 30, 2022 by Spartan Girl

[Bill1978]

7 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Happy that we finally got the whole tragic Dumbledore family history that the Deathly Hollows movie skimmed over.

I've only read the books once and years ago, maybe even a decade but this was covered in the book? When I was watching those scenes, I felt like I had the sotry explained to me before, but couldn't remember if it was in the HP saga or in the book. So I wasn't imagining things that I technically knew some of the stuff shown about the Dumbledore family before watching this movie.

[Spartan Girl]

9 hours ago, Bill1978 said:

I've only read the books once and years ago, maybe even a decade but this was covered in the book? When I was watching those scenes, I felt like I had the sotry explained to me before, but couldn't remember if it was in the HP saga or in the book. So I wasn't imagining things that I technically knew some of the stuff shown about the Dumbledore family before watching this movie.

Yes, it was in the DH book, but left out of the movie, which was a shame, since it was one of the best parts. And officially coming out with the fact that Dumbledore was in love with Grindelwald, not to mention the Credence/Aberforth stuff does an an extra layer of tragedy to Ariana’s death.

[blueray]

I finally saw the 3 one, as it was on HBO Max (which I already have). Anyhow, this movie was way better then the 2 one, which I didn't like. 

I do however wish the Qullin (sp) bowed to either Newt or Jacob at the end of the movie. Dumbledore just didn't make sense as we know he isn't true of heart and a boring choice to be honest. I feel like Jacob would have been awesome as it would have stuck it the racist pigs by having it bow to a muggle. It would have provided the movie with a "yes!" moment which it was kind of lacking. While this didn't happen, I can help but wonder if we do get a 4th movie, if this will end up being a "I knew it" moment between Newt & Dumbledore regarding it bowing to Jacob. As enough fans have complained about the same thing, while wouldn't be as awesome, it still could lead to a nice character moment in a later movie. 

Newt however also make sense, as it is his franchise supposedly. And the creature is already close to him as he saved it. And he is a wizard. But I still would pick Jacob over him as it would have had more of an impact in that specific scene. But unfortunately we got neither :(. 

Anyhow, the rest of the movie was entertaining. I do however still feel like they are trying to do two movies at once. There is the Dumbledore & Grindelward stuff and the fantastic beast story. I prefer the later, give me the team from the first movie and some creatures :). I think this is many due to everything being so depressing & hard in real life that I really could uses a fun adventure with cute creatures right now. 

[KatWay]

1 hour ago, blueray said:

I finally saw the 3 one, as it was on HBO Max (which I already have). Anyhow, this movie was way better then the 2 one, which I didn't like. 

I do however wish the Qullin (sp) bowed to either Newt or Jacob at the end of the movie. Dumbledore just didn't make sense as we know he isn't true of heart and a boring choice to be honest. I feel like Jacob would have been awesome as it would have stuck it the racist pigs by having it bow to a muggle. It would have provided the movie with a "yes!" moment which it was kind of lacking. While this didn't happen, I can help but wonder if we do get a 4th movie, if this will end up being a "I knew it" moment between Newt & Dumbledore regarding it bowing to Jacob. As enough fans have complained about the same thing, while wouldn't be as awesome, it still could lead to a nice character moment in a later movie.

but I think they explained this, in that the Qilin was supposed to find the best potential leader for the Wizarding World. I mean I doubt Miss Santos was the second most pure-hearted person on that stage either, but she was a politician and had the experience and they briefly indicated that she was the better choice between her and Liu Dao, since she showed compassion towards Jacob. Neither Newt nor Jacob would make any sense to lead the Wizarding World. Maybe they should have made that a bit clearer in the previous scene, but I think it was supposed to be a misdirect (audience expecting it to bow to nice, jovial Jacob but it rather being about showing Dumbledore he's a better man/leader than he thinks and that he needs to step up instead of staying on the sidelines of this conflict).

[blueray]

5 hours ago, KatWay said:

but I think they explained this, in that the Qilin was supposed to find the best potential leader for the Wizarding World. I mean I doubt Miss Santos was the second most pure-hearted person on that stage either, but she was a politician and had the experience and they briefly indicated that she was the better choice between her and Liu Dao, since she showed compassion towards Jacob. Neither Newt nor Jacob would make any sense to lead the Wizarding World. Maybe they should have made that a bit clearer in the previous scene, but I think it was supposed to be a misdirect (audience expecting it to bow to nice, jovial Jacob but it rather being about showing Dumbledore he's a better man/leader than he thinks and that he needs to step up instead of staying on the sidelines of this conflict).

I suppose, I still wish for the pure-heart thing be more of the leading cause to pick someone then who could lead. I was thinking in the scenario that it picked Jacob he wouldn't have served (obviously).  As seen in the movie, when Dumbledore says no, they try again. So may it would just be the same? She would have still been "elected". It would have just changed the emotional impact of the scene.  Yes, I wish they made this more clear. But I do realize this wasn't that important in the story. 

Edited June 5, 2022 by blueray

[bigseach]

Grindlewald should have been either of the mikklesen brothers from the beginning.  Both do a nuanced villain very well.

a bit of musing on the creedence situation.  From what we learned in the second film, Aurelius was taken by his aunt to the states; and Corvus taken to the states by a nanny and his sister.

I’m a bit baffled as it appears that the idea was that Corvus was to be adopted by an anti witch woman and leta to be brought up in the uk? Corvus being raised by barebones would have made him an obscurus as well, unless he was a squib… I understand why how was sent away in the first place, but I don’t see why leta was on the ship at all. Did the father die at some point, and custody of leta go to the uk branch of the family?  
 

this is why I prefer books to movies. We would have this cleared up instead of there being a bit of a mess.

[BetterButter]

[Scarlett45]

On 6/5/2022 at 6:57 PM, bigseach said:

I’m a bit baffled as it appears that the idea was that Corvus was to be adopted by an anti witch woman and leta to be brought up in the uk? Corvus being raised by barebones would have made him an obscurus as well, unless he was a squib… I understand why how was sent away in the first place, but I don’t see why leta was on the ship at all. Did the father die at some point, and custody of leta go to the uk branch of the family?  

That’s what I thought. That Leta was raised by her Mother’s family, and Cornvus was left in the states.

Can someone clarify for me WHY the blood pact between Dumbledore and Grindelwald was broken? Was it because Grindelwald didn’t love him any more? Why can they fight each other now?

Edited to add- KEEP WATCHING THE MOVIE!! They explained it, a spell to kill and a spell to protect came together, makes sense. Reminds me of how Lily’s sacrifice protected Harry. 

[bigseach]

It also may explain why the blood pact held when arianna died.   One comes to the conclusion that grindlewald left very quickly after her death and albus was in no condition to make a blood pact at that time. it had to be made before.
 

From albus and aberforth’s accounts of the incident, the quarrel started with the brothers arguing over albus and grindlewald taking arianna on a hallows quest. Aberforth quite rightly said this was not a workable plan. As aberforth was at least a year from his wizard adulthood he could not have custody of arianna.

the argument got quite heated and aberforth drew his wand and albus drew his. They started the magic flying. At one point grindlewald joins in and uses the cruciatus on aberforth. Arianna joins the fray and dies, her death stops the fight. Grindlewald flees the scene and the country.

It took a bit of action between grindlewald and albus before the pact started to break, that did not happen in the earlier incident.  I’m fairly sure that albus would have come to aberforth’s defence, but the death of arianna stopped the fight before it got to the point that it did in secrets of dumbledore.

[Camera One]

I was originally sad to hear that the series might not continue, even though I thought the second movie was pretty bad.  I normally really enjoy the wizarding world, since it is so detailed with something new to discover each time.  But this movie really lost me. 

I was not engaged and was almost bored for the first half hour, even though it was visually very beautiful.  The first movie was fun, but there wasn't much more potential in character development with Newt and his friends.  If there were more movies, they should have been stand-alone adventures.  The second movie didn't work since it felt like they were unnaturally shoe-horning Newt into the Dumbledore vs. Grindelwald story, on top of generating contrived conflicts with Jacob and Queenie, and Newt and Tina.

That issue was still a big hindrance to this movie.  By combining Dumbledore's story with Newt's adventures, both got the short shrift.  The annoyingly cryptic missions that Dumbledore gave the team members felt totally random.  Why was Newt's brother sent to that prison?  Why didn't Grindelwald's gang go after the others? 

They also needed to establish this international wizarding organization and those two candidates more if this was to be a major plot point.  The Qilin's role in the election was also unclear.  Because a Qilin was available, there was no need to vote anymore?  

They didn't give Credence or Queenie enough to do to justify their redemption in the end.  Both should have risked a bit more to help the "good" side if they wanted us to root for them at the end.   Especially Queenie if they wanted to end with a happy wedding.  But she was such a peripheral character.  Even if the actress was unavailable, Tina's absence for much of the movie was so poorly explained.  

Overall, I was super disappointed by this movie because I was really hoping to like it.  It's a shame because on their own, the various characters are likeable, even the individual members of the main team like the professor and Newt's brother.  I did find young Dumbledore to be a bit of a bore, though, as he was in the last one.  I think I could have felt more for him if we actually saw his full backstory in flashback in a movie just about him where he actually had a character arc.

[tv echo]

Eddie Redmayne on ‘Cabaret’, ‘Fantastic Beasts’ and the physical cost of performance
James Mottram      20th January 2023
https://www.nme.com/features/film-interviews/eddie-redmayne-cabaret-jessie-buckley-fantastic-beasts-3383935 

Quote

Looking at your wider career, do you think you’ll be known as Newt from the Fantastic Beasts films?
“I have no idea. But I love Newt. So if that’s the case, then I’m thrilled by that.”

Would you love to dive back into the Wizarding World if a fourth film came around?
“I mean, at the moment, there’s nothing that I’m aware of. So, as I’m aware, it’s not something that’s on the cards.”

Edited January 25, 2023 by tv echo